LEO BYFORD
5244 SOUTH IRVINGTON PLACE
TULSA OKLAHOMA 74135
PHONE 1-918-622-6413
CELL 1-918-902-5730
FAX 1-918-622-7066

MAKE A CALL
PAGE 9
March 26, 2008
I have stated several times in the MAKE A CALL series letters that the health, safety , and environmental issues in Eastern Oklahoma are longer just about the Tar Creek Superfund Site. The Make A CALL letters were not and are not meant or written by me seeking answers for any of the questions presented in the letters from anyone reading the web site or the letters, but were presented to provide information and help in resolving the many issues of health, safety and environmental issues facing all of us in the nation and especially Oklahoma. I have tried to inform the people at superfund sites, like Tar Creek, of issues where EPA and other governmental agencies are deliberately not providing families and children protection that the federal laws provides and allows, for protecting each of us from hazardous materials and hazardous substance. Decisions that only benefit EPA and state agencies, and a selected few, by not following the federal law, is unacceptable. I am going to find out if a federal court will follow the laws, enacted by Congress and the court is suppose to be following, or if laws were enacted with two sets of standards. The old saying DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO comes to mind. To those being affect by the buyout, your issues are not with the trust authority, but with the EPA and State agencies. You can demonstrate till the world looks level, but until you start calling or writing the news media and your elected officials, the government is NOT going to provide you with what the law authorizes and provides for each of you, because you have not called their hand, as I have done or made a calls, which I have also done. Had enough, become a thorn as I have done. The superfund and the buyout are not just local issues. I would suggest contacting editors of the Tulsa World, The Oklahoman in OKC, or managers at any TV station that has connections with national news sources, then you will see results in correcting many of the issues. You are not the only families having issues with abandon mine sites or mine workings or hazardous materials. There are over 1500 hundred other locations in the United States dealing with superfund issues, where federal laws have not been enforced by government agencies and not protecting thousands of the people.
Now that ODEQ has placed and expanded a lead warning for Grand Lake, it will be interesting to see the coming results of Grand Lake property values, hope this is not the start of the Tar Creek Superfund site being expanded to include Grand Lake, Miami or possibly even Grove? Wonder why the results of the downstream lakes reports were not published? Now that GRDA has started it’s plight to gain land, whether land owners want to sell or not, what happens and where will it stop? It will be interesting to see those who have been against the buyout and not using permanent solutions, jump on the property owners on the west side of Grand Lake. If I remember correctly Senator Inhofe is one of the residents at Grand Lake, why don’t you jump on the Senator, see how many calls it will take before the Senator steps forward, knowing that he does not have your vote or your local state or federal Congressman doesn’t have your vote. I would think that those lake owners did not know that a lead warning for Grand Lake was going to be issued, or the litter and animal waste was going to be a problem for the lake or maybe signs saying DO NOT GO INTO THE WATER, COULD BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH would have been in their future. You might want to reference the impaired water list of the EPA and especially for waters in Eastern Oklahoma and what is causing the impairment. Let’s see how EPA and others will come up with a plan to spend taxpayer dollars on making new water, air, and land.
As most of you know, I have been very diligent in expressing the pollution and safety problems/issues in Eastern Oklahoma. I do appreciate the calls that have been made, demonstrating that I am not the only one that has serious concerns with issues now facing Eastern Oklahoma and the serious results from the lack of permanent results from government agencies in correcting pollution and safety issues. As I sat through the court proceedings, concerning the poultry litter, several thoughts occurred to me.
PUBLISHED TULSA WORLD LETTER TO THE EDITOR WED MARCH 26,2008
As I listen to the closing arguments in federal court concerning the chicken litter issues, I asked myself, who really wins? If the state wins, where will the litter be applied or sent to? What if it sent to the Tulsa area? What if it sent to another watershed upstream of Tulsa? What happens to the more than 15,000 jobs and other supporting industries of the poultry industry?
What happens if the poultry industry wins and is allowed to continue the practice of applying litter to the land in the watersheds, impaired or not? What happens to the impaired watersheds of Eastern Oklahoma? The EPA Environmental Protection Agency) has already declared more than 500 water impairments in our lakes and rivers and a lead warning has been issued for Grand Lake. What is next? How does a court make a ruling? Does the court follow the laws of the federal government? I would hate to be in the court’s position, because no manner what it decides, Oklahoma loses. How will the court ruling affect the growth and/or pollution in Eastern Oklahoma by industry and our tax base?
I would suggest that if there is anyone who does not understand what the court ruling means, make a call and take a minute to find out how this will have effect on your pocketbook and your family’s health.
The only winners are the attorney’s. They still get paid.
Wonder why permanent solutions did not make the news media or court?
EPA STRIKES AGAIN
You may now be asking yourself, what has this got to do with the Tar Creek Superfund Site and the Tri-State Mining District or superfund sites. The only difference in between the litter lawsuit and TAR CREEK is litter being applied to land and CHAT/ contaminated materials being applied outside the federal law requirements. The answer is very simple and briefly explained.
On February 4, 2008, I did file a federal lawsuit ( Case # 08 CV 057 CVE). I do realize that the EPA will probably have dozens of their top notch attorneys in court to face just one simple and concern person, acting PRO SE. One might be asking what is wrong with this guy, is he just nuts? I can assure you nothing is wrong with me, but I am tried of seeing families and children placed at risk and issues facing those in the buyout being violated by agencies not following the federal laws, somebody has to take a stand. I am tied of the EPA making the rules up as they go, just to fit the EPA‘s needs and the heck with the federal law. I do not know what one person can do, but it will be very interesting to hear EPA attorneys objecting to federal laws and just how far a federal judge will allow the EPA to go in continuing their evasion of the federal laws. To those reading this posting clearly understands my intentions and reasons for this lawsuit, it is really very simple. I will not say everything that will be presented in court, but I can say, now that the filing is a public document, that the EPA, government agencies, and elected officials provided many of the documents that will be presented in court and where to find the federal laws demonstrating the violations, which will ensure that I prevail in my lawsuit, that is how far above the federal law EPA thinks they are. We will find out how and why the EPA can write RODS (Record of Decisions) that do not offer or provide permanent solutions, as required by federal laws and the justification of continued pollution and safety issues. We will find out why the EPA does not want permanent solutions for the Tar Creek Superfund Site and the Tri State Mining District or other superfund sites. There are a lot of other issues the EPA will be required to address in court. Will the politicians continue to ride the fence and look for votes or take a stand against the EPA and support permanent solutions and support federal laws? Will the politicians continue to bury their heads in the sand and hope these issues will simply go away, before election time? Will the EPA continue to act above the laws of Congress and continue to ignore Congressional laws? Will the families in the buyout get a fair price for their misfortune? Will those responsible for the continued contamination of Eastern Oklahoma be allowed to go untested? Will Superfund Sites like Tar Creek be allowed to continue to contaminate for another 20 to 30 years or longer as the EPA has decided for Tar Creek (O U 4)? Will the areas now receiving the contaminated chat become a new problem? Will the court follow the laws or will EPA dictate to the courts? Will it take a federal court to force the EPA to apply permanent solutions and permanent solutions finally be put in place, as required by federal law? I can only say that I would not like to be the judge who has to make the decision. It will be very interesting, for these questions will be answered.
You Can Still Make a Call.


Leo Byford